Habitat Conservation Under Attack - HB 5
- Thread starter Ben Lamb
- Start date
HB 5 passed the Senate yesterday on Third reading. It will go back to the House and we expect a conference committee to meet and discuss the bill.
More: http://www.mtbullypulpit.org/2013/04/the-habitat-conservation-blues.html
More: http://www.mtbullypulpit.org/2013/04/the-habitat-conservation-blues.html
While y'all are bitching about tags, your access is being frittered away.
Frenchy
Well-known member
Help me out on this one. I'm a little confused on whats going on with this one. As I understand it, if this bill passes, it removes the ability of FWP to purchase land. Instead, it forces them to rely soley on leases and easements for public acess.
But when I look at the votes, it seems as the usual suspects of "bad guys" are the one voting against it. Including Brenden and Barrett.
What am I missing.
But when I look at the votes, it seems as the usual suspects of "bad guys" are the one voting against it. Including Brenden and Barrett.
What am I missing.
The way Senate Finance & Claims wrote the bill, it would exclude comseration easements and fee title acquisition and only allow short term easements.
There already exists a program formshort termeasements and easements across privatecland but the demand is extremely low. So if this goes forward, it will be close to impossible to reverse the language in future sessins, and it would ensure that a large pot of money sits in an account and cannot be used at all unless formshort term easements,cwhich, as we know, have little demand.
With a lot of variation and negotiation, yes.
This is such a stupid attempt by those in the Senate. They know it is bad for wildlife and bad policy for Montana, but they would rather grind their political axes and thump their chests about how they laid the pipe to FWP. In reality, they are laying the pipe to Montanans.
To eliminate the option of fee title and easements needs little explanation as to what a bad idea it is. I have a list in front of me of potential properties that are high on the list of critical wildlife habitat. Most often, those are acquired by non-profits and land trusts, at huge discounts, then resold to FWP for pennies on the dollar.
Seems kind of stupid to eliminate the possibility of FWP acquirng critical assets at huge discounts. But, stupidity seems to be the standard of excellence many fringe operators in this legislature try to attain. I would say they have far exceeded that standard in this session.
This would be a big kick in the crotch for future wildlife acquisitions in Montana. Think Wall Creek, Sun River, Indain Creek, Beartooth, Bear Creek, Porcupine, Buffalo Horn, Dome Mountain, Fleecer Mountain, .... hell, I could go on and on. Here is a map of many of these very critical places that have been protected with hunter dollars and the efforts of FWP.
http://fwp.mt.gov/fishAndWildlife/wma/wmaMap.html
Look at that map an you will see that the wintering ranges that help support some of the deer and elk you hunt are still intacts because of the work of hunters, FWP, generous conservation-minded landowners, and the many great non-profit conservation partners who have helped FWP secure these properties.
And now, it is all at risk because a couple fringe operators, with their small ideas and big egos, want to use their elected political position to take another swipe at hunters, access, and wildlife. A joke ... a very bad joke.
Hopefully Ben or Vito can give us a link of the key people in the House who might see the light and respond to pressure we can apply, and will stand up to these fringe operators.
To eliminate the option of fee title and easements needs little explanation as to what a bad idea it is. I have a list in front of me of potential properties that are high on the list of critical wildlife habitat. Most often, those are acquired by non-profits and land trusts, at huge discounts, then resold to FWP for pennies on the dollar.
Seems kind of stupid to eliminate the possibility of FWP acquirng critical assets at huge discounts. But, stupidity seems to be the standard of excellence many fringe operators in this legislature try to attain. I would say they have far exceeded that standard in this session.
This would be a big kick in the crotch for future wildlife acquisitions in Montana. Think Wall Creek, Sun River, Indain Creek, Beartooth, Bear Creek, Porcupine, Buffalo Horn, Dome Mountain, Fleecer Mountain, .... hell, I could go on and on. Here is a map of many of these very critical places that have been protected with hunter dollars and the efforts of FWP.
http://fwp.mt.gov/fishAndWildlife/wma/wmaMap.html
Look at that map an you will see that the wintering ranges that help support some of the deer and elk you hunt are still intacts because of the work of hunters, FWP, generous conservation-minded landowners, and the many great non-profit conservation partners who have helped FWP secure these properties.
And now, it is all at risk because a couple fringe operators, with their small ideas and big egos, want to use their elected political position to take another swipe at hunters, access, and wildlife. A joke ... a very bad joke.
Hopefully Ben or Vito can give us a link of the key people in the House who might see the light and respond to pressure we can apply, and will stand up to these fringe operators.
Frenchy
Well-known member
Here is the response I received from my legislator.
Hi David,
Thanks for your concerns regarding FWP and HB 5. The governors office has assured those in my caucus that he will remove the anti-FWP portion of this bill by amendatory veto when it reaches his desk. As such, I plan to support HB 5.
Hi David,
Thanks for your concerns regarding FWP and HB 5. The governors office has assured those in my caucus that he will remove the anti-FWP portion of this bill by amendatory veto when it reaches his desk. As such, I plan to support HB 5.
webejmn
New member
Arggghhhh!!! Contacted my house rep (old huntin' buddy) I would be willing to bet he would vote no without no input, but non the less he has my input!
Also contacted another that I know and gave him my input. You're right Ben, tags mean nothing if you don't have access!
Thanks for making us aware!! Again!
Last edited:
